A fundamental question about all ethical theories is: what is a value? Emotovist theories all answer that question the same way: a value is an expression of emotion. So an ethical judgment, according to this theory, is radically different from an ordinary judgment. For example, an ethical judgment that something is morally good or morally wrong is not a natural or intuitional judgment that involves ascribing a property to something; instead, it is more like an interjection, optative, or performative.
Emotivism is also known as noncognitivism.
I think consequentalism is a form of ethics, where emotivism is a system of meta-ethics, so they aren't mutually exclusive. A form of conseuentalism may value emotional states to be maximised (say, in Hedonism) which might be determined in relation to our emotional evaluations. The ethical moment to which an emotivist would react to might be in the consequence of the action or in reaction to the maxim governing action. Ayer's belief that morals are subjective, lacking a truth value, means that the meta-ethical system of emotivism can be alligned with any ethical system.
A simple definition of emotivism is that when people say something morally, it does not mean that it is true, but that it only expresses the feelings of the speaker.
approves of the act.
What is ethics in IT?
Regular ethics are the science of morals, and morals or little ethics are guidelines of ethics.
difference between ethics and business ethics
1.Trasactional ethics 2.Participatory ethics 3.Recongnitional ethics
Ethics and the law
Some types of ethics include justice based ethics, right based ethics, duty based and virtue based ethics.